Culture Don’t want sex at the same time as your partner? Try this technique instead

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

By Ian Kerner, CNN
6 minute read · Updated 1:28 PM EDT, Fri March 29, 2024


1.jpg
The concept of responsive desire puts pleasure first, sex educator Dr. Emily Nagoski said.
Aleksandr Kuzmin/Tetra images RF/Getty Images


Editor’s Note: Ian Kerner is a licensed marriage and family therapist, writer, and contributor on the topic of relationships for CNN. His most recent book is a guide for couples, “So Tell Me About the Last Time You Had Sex.”

(CNN) — Sex equals intercourse. If you’re not having sex like porn stars, you’re not having good sex. Scheduled sex is unnatural.

We live in a society in which we are barraged with those sex myths.

One of the most pernicious myths is that sexual desire is “an electric spark of wanting” that happens naturally and instantaneously. If you don’t experience desire like a bolt of lightning below the waist, there is something’s wrong with you.

In her first book, “Come As You Are: The Surprising New Science That Will Transform Your Sex Life,” sex educator Dr. Emily Nagoski waged a battle against this concept of spontaneous desire, especially on behalf of women who felt they were broken if they didn’t experience desire that way.

But what happens in long-term relationships when two partners have a different path to desire and can’t get there at the same time or in the same way? To answer these questions, Nagoski has written a new book called “Come Together: The Science (and Art!) of Creating Lasting Sexual Connections” that focuses on maintaining sexual compatibility in long-term relationships.

2.jpg
In "Come Together: The Science (and Art!) of Creating Lasting Sexual Connections," Nagoski explains the hurdles that can dampen sexual enjoyment with a long-term partner and how to break free of them.
CNN


I talked with Nagoski recently to learn more.

This conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Ian Kerner: In “Come As You Are,” you highlighted the difference between spontaneous desire and responsive desire. Can you explain that concept?

Dr. Emily Nagoski: Unlike spontaneous desire — this idea that we experience desire for sex out of the blue — the concept of responsive desire puts pleasure first. It means that your desire for sex emerges in response to pleasure. When you’re experiencing responsive desire, your body goes, “Oh, right. Yes, this. Hooray!”

Around the time I was writing my first book, pharmaceutical companies were developing drugs for women who didn’t experience spontaneous desire — “pink Viagra,” essentially. But it was clear to me that what they were treating was not a problem. They were treating the fact that people believed a cultural lie. And that’s what I wrote about: Basically, responsive desire is not a disease. There’s no such thing as normal when it comes to sex, and there’s more than one way of experiencing sexual desire.

Kerner: Let’s talk about your impetus to write “Come As You Are.” You get pretty honest about your own sex life.

Nagoski: Ironically, when I write a book, it is very bad for my sex life. Even though I’m reading and writing and thinking and talking about sex all the time, I end up with no interest in actually having sex. After I finished writing “Come As You Are,” things got a little better in my sex life with my husband, but then I went on a book tour, and they got a lot worse. I tried to follow my own advice, which was to put your body in bed and let your skin touch your partner’s skin, so you create context that lets your body access pleasure. And your body goes, “Yeah, that was a great idea.”

But when I did this, I literally just burst into tears and fell asleep instead. And I thought that I needed better advice than I gave in my own book. So I started looking at the peer-reviewed research to see how successful couples sustain a strong sexual connection.

Kerner: Desire discrepancy is the No. 1 sexual issue that couples in long-term relationships seem to grapple with: low desire, no desire, mismatched libidos, a feeling of sexual incompatibility. In “Come Together,” you ask us to see the issue differently. Rather than focusing on desire, you write that “pleasure is the measure,” and that the goal should be centering pleasure.

Nagoski: I was already moving in this direction in “Come As You Are,” and when I looked at the research in this area, the clearer it became that optimal sexual experiences are truly not about desire. When you talk to people who have great sex lives, they don’t talk about desire. It is just not part of the equation. Instead, they talk about pleasure; they talk about authenticity and vulnerability. And above all, they talk about empathy.

Personally, I was interested in having sex, but I could not get to a place where my body was ready for it because I was not in the right mental state. I knew that if I could just get there, my husband and I would have great, joyful, pleasurable, connected, engaging, wonderful sex. But there’s such a strong relationship between stress and struggling with accessing sexual pleasure. That’s what the challenge was for me.

Kerner: We often may not have an innate sense of desire for sex, but to get to pleasure we still need to have willingness and motivation, right? We still need to overcome all those everyday stressors that smother sex. This is where you talk about the concept of the “emotional floor plan,” which is essentially just a model of various emotional “spaces” and how they interact — or don’t — with your “lust” or “sexy space.”

Nagoski: For me, there’s no direct path from my stress space to my sexy space. I have to move through another space in the floor plan first. If I’m in a curious, intellectually engaged, exploratory, adventurous or playful state of mind, it’s easy for me to get into a lust state of mind. I need to make the transition from stress to play and then to lust.
Obviously, everyone’s emotional floor plan is different. Some people can get right from feeling stressed to feeling sexy, for example. Others need to move through feeling cared for before they can get to lust. But the key is to identify which spaces you’re usually in before you feel sexy, and then to do things that get you to a state of mind where you’re open to feeling pleasure.

Kerner: You talk about couples needing a “third thing” in their relationships. What does that mean?

Nagoski: This is a concept I derived from an essay by the poet Donald Hall. He wrote of his relationship with his wife that, “We did not spend our days gazing into each other’s eyes … most of the time our gazes met and entwined as they looked at a third thing.” That third thing can be anything that you’re both excited about or share interest in — your kids, your pets, your favorite sport or musician or TV show. And when you make your sex life a third thing, it becomes a shared point of fascination that you want to work on together.

Kerner: So many of us grew up in homes that were either sex-avoidant — it’s like sex didn’t even exist — or sex-negative — an environment of reproach and shame. So how do we foster “sex positivity” in our own relationships?

Nagoski: For me, being sex positive means having basic bodily autonomy: Everyone gets to choose how and when they are touched and how they feel about their body. That’s freedom — and when we feel free, that’s when we can access pleasure.
 
This is a lot of words that say a whole lot of nothing. This is why people have an inherent distrust of therapists/head doctors, you say a lot of shit, but offer very little recourse. And I'm partially okay with that, because I'm not a complete robot and know humans aren't automatons where a fix for whatever is a one-size fits all solution. I don't have an answer for anything, but a lot of "mental health" is "try something different," that's very fucking profound doctor, why didn't I think of that before.
 
I tried to follow my own advice, which was to put your body in bed and let your skin touch your partner’s skin, so you create context that lets your body access pleasure. And your body goes, “Yeah, that was a great idea.”

But when I did this, I literally just burst into tears and fell asleep instead.
If this is supposed to get me interested in buying her second book, it's not doing a great job. Every time I see columns from "sex educators," it seems to be more about their own hangups and issues than solving others'.
 
If this is supposed to get me interested in buying her second book, it's not doing a great job. Every time I see columns from "sex educators," it seems to be more about their own hangups and issues than solving others'.
What they describe does in fact work, provided both individuals are at most slightly damaged.

This chick is not slightly damaged. She is massively damaged.
 
If this is supposed to get me interested in buying her second book, it's not doing a great job. Every time I see columns from "sex educators," it seems to be more about their own hangups and issues than solving others'.

I was once told that anyone wanting a career in psychology, therapy, or anything tangental to that was mostly just trying to figure out why they themselves were so fucked up. I was told this by someone who was majoring in psychology and who I would have agreed was kind of fucked up in a way to warrant that desire. Maybe some of them have their lives together better than their patients, but unless someone is so fucked up that they legitimately need prescription medication so that they stop thinking that their toaster wants them to burn down the local elementary school, I think that most people would be just as well off having a beer with friends and blowing off steam or bullshitting about whatever is bothering them.
 
Unlike spontaneous desire — this idea that we experience desire for sex out of the blue — the concept of responsive desire puts pleasure first. It means that your desire for sex emerges in response to pleasure. When you’re experiencing responsive desire, your body goes, “Oh, right. Yes, this. Hooray!”
I mean, this is just pretty much the way it is if you're with someone for a long time. There's occasionally the spontaneous stuff still, but usually it's more one person starting things and the other getting into it. If it's not like that and you're having no sex then one of you probably just secretly hates the other or is secretly grossed out by the other or is fucking around or has a rampant porn addiction.
 
Up next, the benefits of Pedophilia
They already did this one, I remember Metokur covering how a bunch of news sites tried to justify pedophilia with articles labeled "I am not a monster", they had fine people such as the following as examples of "not monsters":

1712019681549.png


This one stuck out to me as it was a literal monster looking fucker, and people dug into his past on Reddit of all places and found he was in fact part of online groups that advocating molesting children.
 
Ian Kerner
I have one of this guy's books.

It's actually very good. The main value I got from it is in understanding women's sexual anatomy. I know how a dick works, because, y'know, I have one. But it's good to read up on your partner's anatomy. In fact, a lot of women are woefully ignorant about how their own bits work.

Though the psych aspect in all these sex books is more or less useless. I mean, maybe not entirely useless, but still, I think setting up a romantic evening should really be more of an art, not a science. And it'll vary from person to person anyway.

Edit: The book I had is She Comes First, and if I remember correctly, it opened up with how he's got horrible microdick or ED or something and how he learned to get around it to pleasure his partners lol.
 
I was once told that anyone wanting a career in psychology, therapy, or anything tangental to that was mostly just trying to figure out why they themselves were so fucked up. I was told this by someone who was majoring in psychology and who I would have agreed was kind of fucked up in a way to warrant that desire. Maybe some of them have their lives together better than their patients, but unless someone is so fucked up that they legitimately need prescription medication so that they stop thinking that their toaster wants them to burn down the local elementary school, I think that most people would be just as well off having a beer with friends and blowing off steam or bullshitting about whatever is bothering them.
You are correct. This is also why there are warnings in early psychology courses for students to stop trying to diagnose themselves, friends, and family members. Most people gain an interest in the subject because they are trying to solve their/someone else's problems.

In good cases, those people will realize that they are relatively normal and occasional anxiety, depression, etc is a normal part of life.

In bad cases, people learn to justify their own actions with medical terminology while demonizing others. Think how "I was in a dark place," "narcissist," and "sociopath" are overused online, except this is a person who wants to be paid to give you therapeutic advice.

Personally, I have never and would never trust a sex therapist. They are most creepy ones, wanting to invade the most private areas of people to best plan how to convince a partner to give into another's carnal desires. I have never seen one advocate for a person to reign in degeneracy for the good of themselves or a partner. It is always advocacy to try increasingly unconventional things "to see if you like it!"
 
Personally, I have never and would never trust a sex therapist. They are most creepy ones, wanting to invade the most private areas of people to best plan how to convince a partner to give into another's carnal desires. I have never seen one advocate for a person to reign in degeneracy for the good of themselves or a partner. It is always advocacy to try increasingly unconventional things "to see if you like it!"
I mean yeah, you don't go to a football coach to learn how to play football less.
 
They already did this one, I remember Metokur covering how a bunch of news sites tried to justify pedophilia with articles labeled "I am not a monster", they had fine people such as the following as examples of "not monsters":

View attachment 5870144

This one stuck out to me as it was a literal monster looking fucker, and people dug into his past on Reddit of all places and found he was in fact part of online groups that advocating molesting children.
Yeah. That is a face of an actual monster. Pedos unironically deserve the rope. No such thing as a virtuous pedophile. Just a perv who wants to get off using a child. And the shitty part is that our elites are made up of said monsters.


Obligatory.

You are correct. This is also why there are warnings in early psychology courses for students to stop trying to diagnose themselves, friends, and family members. Most people gain an interest in the subject because they are trying to solve their/someone else's problems.

In good cases, those people will realize that they are relatively normal and occasional anxiety, depression, etc is a normal part of life.

In bad cases, people learn to justify their own actions with medical terminology while demonizing others. Think how "I was in a dark place," "narcissist," and "sociopath" are overused online, except this is a person who wants to be paid to give you therapeutic advice.

Tragically, our society is mired in the bad ones. Tumblr is infamous for self-diagnosing. Is isn't a coincidence when they start telling everyone of their self-diagnosis. They're looking for attention and for affirmation for their retardation. Just like today when they start ruining everything nice for their ideology.

Another sick coincidence is that Tumblrites and our elites are both selfish attentionwhores who hate getting denied of their delusions. I'm certain that is the other reason why they opened the system up to the cancer besides being instrumental in dismantling Occupy Wallstreet.
 
Yeah. That is a face of an actual monster.
It always makes me laugh in a morbid kind of way, I can't imagine finding a better depiction of "monster" in human form to put as the posterchild. The only thing that could make him look worse is if he was covered in blood or wearing a pelt made out of a human baby.
 
No offense but if I bought a book and that was the opener I'd bury it in the backyard and hope nobody found it.
Lol I mean if he was a limpdick blubbery nerd and he managed to learn something about seducing women, maybe he's got something to study. Maybe not. All I can do is take a peek at his writings. Likewise, I can still read the communist manifesto and conclude they learned zero about social dynamics, and thus throw communist nonsense into the trash.
 
Lol I mean if he was a limpdick blubbery nerd and he managed to learn something about seducing women, maybe he's got something to study. Maybe not. All I can do is take a peek at his writings. Likewise, I can still read the communist manifesto and conclude they learned zero about social dynamics, and thus throw communist nonsense into the trash.
Look man I didn't say I wouldn't read it, but I'd be livid if anyone found out I bought it.

Now to find out how to order shit to a P.O. box, under a fake name, with an anonymously bought Amazon gift card...
 
Back